Defendants: Bad blood, dead dog led to land grab lawsuit

Monday

Apr 7, 2014 at 6:19 PM

CLINTON — A dead dog and bad blood, Bill Pruitt says, were behind an Anderson County Chancery Court legal action against him that was dropped by the petitioner — a candidate for chancellor — minutes into a scheduled two-day bench trial Wednesday morning.

At issue was a Chancery Court petition filed by J. Philip Harber to sell three tracts of land originally owned by relatives of Bill and Shirley Pruitt and surrounding the tiny tract where the Pruitts’ dilapidated home is located.

Associated Press

CLINTON — A dead dog and bad blood, Bill Pruitt says, were behind an Anderson County Chancery Court legal action against him that was dropped by the petitioner — a candidate for chancellor — minutes into a scheduled two-day bench trial Wednesday morning.

At issue was a Chancery Court petition filed by J. Philip Harber to sell three tracts of land originally owned by relatives of Bill and Shirley Pruitt and surrounding the tiny tract where the Pruitts’ dilapidated home is located.

Harber last winter purchased quitclaim deeds from the Pruitt’s relatives, giving him partial ownership of those surrounding lands.

Harber is a Republican running for chancellor. His attorney, Mike Clement, is a Democrat running for Anderson County Juvenile Court judge.

Minutes into opening testimony, attorneys for both sides met in Chancellor Bill Lantrip’s chambers. Clement then announced the case would be voluntarily nonsuited. He said that move was “the legally prudent thing to do.”

Harber declined to comment.

But some of the parties named in Harber’s petition, along with the Pruitts’ attorneys, had plenty to say.

In opening statements, attorney Phil Crye, representing Bill Pruitt’s wife, Shirley, described Harber’s petition as “part of a scheme motivated by animus and ill will to punish Mr. Pruitt and remove him from his property.”

“He (Harber) is trying to punish this poor, unsophisticated man by bringing this lawsuit,” said Bill Pruitt’s lawyer, Mark Foster, in his opening statement.

After court, Bill Pruitt said, “All this occurred over two things: speculation that I killed his (Harber’s) dog in 2007, and he was mad and angry with me because I brought him to court for making false allegations about me and my business.”

Pruitt, a tow truck operator, denied having anything to do with the death of Harber’s dog.

In October, Pruitt sued Harber and his wife, Martha, in Sessions Court, alleging slander and “negligent interference with business relationships,” and the Harbers filed legal action claiming malicious prosecution. Both cases were dismissed in January.

Harber then researched ownership of tracts surrounding the Pruitts’ land, met with the owners and offered them varying amounts of money in exchange for signing quitclaims, according to the Pruitts’ attorneys and some of their relatives.

“He (Harber) wanted to buy their interests to get to my house,” Shirley Pruitt said after the case was dismissed. “He lied to each and every one and told each one a different story.”